SOME RYZEN 7 1700 OVERCLOCKING!

[Panos]

I'm with 8 pack on his oc'ing philosophy. If it doesn't crash in your usage, then it's stable for YOU.

Also, I'm deffinately in the "rather have an extra 200mhz and be 99% stable than 200mhz less and 100% stable".

My pc is on pretty much everyday from 8am until 11pm, it might blue screen a few times a month. I'm ok with that in exchange for the extra performance.

Besides, I'm not convinced it's the overclock causing the bsods anyway (seemsa mix of irq errors). For me, I prefer the term "it's stable enough", and Interestingly it's never crashed during productivity use (rendering, encoding etc). And what does it matter it crashes? The pc is back at the desktop within 10secs anyway.

I don't go anywhere near prime95.

Amen. As long as it doesn't BSOD the OC is stable and I haven't touched prime since the 00s

 

[jay0906]

Well while you can get away with "99% stable" for gaming. If you do other more strenuous tasks such as rendering, encoding you will see that "99% stable" is acutally no where near 99% stable.

 

[Overlag]

It's when it corrupts your data gradually but you don't actually know about it until you realise half your photos or videos don't show up properly. Sure if it's just a benchmark machine that's fair point but even if it's just a gaming machine, if your about to win a game for your team and it bluescreens how annoyed is everyone going to be?

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Well while you can get away with "99% stable" for gaming. If you do other more strenuous tasks such as rendering, encoding you will see that "99% stable" is acutally no where near 99% stable.

As I said in my post - it's never actually crashed while encoding/rendering. Bizarrely it's normally while browsing with Chrome (which kinda makes me think the BSOD's aren't due to the OC anyway).

It's when it corrupts your data gradually but you don't actually know about it until you realise half your photos or videos don't show up properly.

Backups. Ignoring that, I've never experienced data corruption from a "99% stable OC".

Sure if it's just a benchmark machine that's fair point but even if it's just a gaming machine, if your about to win a game for your team and it bluescreens how annoyed is everyone going to be?

It's a game, not a NASA shuttle launch.

 

[Deleted member 651465]

The Prime95 argument is flawed.

If you're using a system for games and it doesn't crash any game with a beefy overclock I'd call that stable.

If you're using a system for heavy photoshop or 3D work and it doesn't crash whilst rendering then I'd call that a stable overclock.

I expect my car would sit on cruise control for a while at 110mph but no doubt struggle to maintain it. Do I drive everywhere at 110mph? No.

Whatever test method you use, it has to match your everyday usage or you'll never truly know if you've hit the sweet spot.

 

[mmj_uk]

Instability doesn't always result in hard crashes though, that's just the most obvious outcome. A few mathematical errors can just cause weird glitches in games such as in the physics or corrupting saves, or in the case of Photoshop/CAD anomalies in the project being rendered.

At the end of the day it comes down to your definition of 'stability', for some people it just means an application not completely crashing whereas for others and 100% of serious industry it means computational/data integrity (ie. 2+2=4 instead of 2+2=5).

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Instability doesn't always result in hard crashes though, that's just the most obvious outcome. A few mathematical errors can just cause weird glitches in games such as in the physics or corrupting saves, or in the case of Photoshop/CAD anomalies in the project being rendered.

At the end of the day it comes down to your definition of 'stability', for some people it just means an application not completely crashing whereas for others and 100% of serious industry it means computational/data integrity (ie. 2+2=4 instead of 2+2=5).

I agree.

When I worked at HP, if we required "computational/data integrity" as you put it but didn't have Opteron/Xeon stations available, we'd underclock and over volt desktops, as stock settings very often couldn't meet those requirements (plus we'd never do stuff like that in Windows!).

There's a reason Xeons etc are clocked lower than desktop counterparts.

 

[balky12]

I've been following the various ryzen threads casually since launch to try and keep up with the latest but apologies if this has been mentioned.

Does disabling cores allow extra headroom for over clocking? Or at least allow for lower voltage with same over clock?

I'm waiting for vega before pulling the trigger so Ryzen and mobos should be in a better position by then.

Would love a Ryzen/ vega set up.

 

[Daaaveee]

Interesting video from Tech Deals, to get 3200mhz ram he had to use a 4000mhz kit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54FEmKgO9yM

 

[DragonQ]

If you are stable at 2933 why change bios. Bios are not an upgrade or essential for a stable system.

I think considering the current state of AM4 motherboards and BIOSs it's definitely worth upgrading for a while yet even with a stable system.

Loving how a top overclocker doesn't use prime... anyone can run a chip at a certain speed but what's the point if it can't add up correctly?

Not prime stable = dud overclock.

I don't know if Prime specifically is "required" for an overclock to be considered stable but considering the amount of effort that usually goes into finding stable overclocks I'd definitely put in the effort to ensure it is properly stable. I've had overclocks before that passed Prime and IBT but then a month later I get a crash at the desktop. A range of tests is probably best and then bump the voltage one or two steps as extra assurance.

Good mate. You use Prime when you have your own range of components and systems!! Can u link me to your systems please??

You realise that isn't actually an argument, right?

 

[8 Pack]

Ofcourse why would I argue I have produced hundreds of pc and servers. Some are in world famous banks, universities,sports teams and other financial institutions around the world where instability can cost millions or incorrect results. So far no issues so I am fairly convinced my way is working fine. I adapt my testing to application which is what I am suggesting all do.

 

[easyrider]

The Prime95 argument is flawed.

If you're using a system for games and it doesn't crash any game with a beefy overclock I'd call that stable.

If you're using a system for heavy photoshop or 3D work and it doesn't crash whilst rendering then I'd call that a stable overclock.

I expect my car would sit on cruise control for a while at 110mph but no doubt struggle to maintain it. Do I drive everywhere at 110mph? No.

Whatever test method you use, it has to match your everyday usage or you'll never truly know if you've hit the sweet spot.

Instability doesn't always result in hard crashes though, that's just the most obvious outcome. A few mathematical errors can just cause weird glitches in games such as in the physics or corrupting saves, or in the case of Photoshop/CAD anomalies in the project being rendered.

At the end of the day it comes down to your definition of 'stability', for some people it just means an application not completely crashing whereas for others and 100% of serious industry it means computational/data integrity (ie. 2+2=4 instead of 2+2=5).

I don't know what all the fuss is about TBH...

Here is my E6400 a 2.13ghz chip running @ 4.119 ghz under my Phase change unit Idle temps -19c load temps 7c

All Ive asked is that anyone can post a Ryzen 1700 running Prime small FFT @4ghz

I test all my clocks using various methods....But my starting point has always been prime....

Over the years I have overclocked chips to their max and then I dial back so I can use my PC in confidence...It can add up, game, render video anything...

My PC is a tool and I want it function correctly...I want it to do its job...I don't want crashes and BSOD when using it....So I test it for stability...

I've done it with my P3,P4 AMD opteron 170, Countless conroe Chips...Q6600 quad cores....i5,i7 and 5820K, 6700K and I will be doing it with Ryzen...

CPU clocking is no different that of GPU clocking....Thats why we run Firestrike..3D mark, Heaven...We clock the GPU and PASS these tests....Now I use this foundation for my clocking....

I could be running in Game in Borderlnads 2 with a clocked GPU and it wouldn't crash...Run the same clocks in Heaven....And I could get Hangs...

The GPU might play in another game, but the crash in others...This is why we test first in Benchies that stress the GPU...Usually a sucessful run in a benchmark would transfer to stability in gaming...

Usually a successful Prime run alongside other test would lead to a stable system for numerous scenarios...

The good old days....

Maxed out the mobo, not the chip

1.7v in bios to see how the phase copes for when i get a 9x multi chip

Setter with his 8 hour Prime run with Q6600

12 hours Prime with My Opteron 170

This Prime buisness has been used for years and years...

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Arguing the applicability of using Prime95 in a Ryzen thread by demonstrating long runs on 12 and 11 year old processors.

Good job!

 

[DarkHorizon472]

The Prime95 argument is flawed.

If you're using a system for games and it doesn't crash any game with a beefy overclock I'd call that stable.

If you're using a system for heavy photoshop or 3D work and it doesn't crash whilst rendering then I'd call that a stable overclock.

I expect my car would sit on cruise control for a while at 110mph but no doubt struggle to maintain it. Do I drive everywhere at 110mph? No.

Whatever test method you use, it has to match your everyday usage or you'll never truly know if you've hit the sweet spot.

That is the most sensible post. It is what you need your system for.

Mine is completely stable for my needs.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

That is the most sensible post. It is what you need your system for.

Mine is completely stable for my needs.

Like my lecturer keeps saying about my dissertation "Don't let perfection get in the way of good enough"

 

[easyrider]

Arguing the applicability of using Prime95 in a Ryzen thread by demonstrating long runs on 12 and 11 year old processors.

Good job!

5820k.....go and do a search...

The official 5820k stability threads...

My point was it's a test that has carried on through the development of the cpu technology...

Ryzen is no different...

Here is 5930k runing Aida64 for 9 hours....

Kubix running his 5930k at 4.75ghz for 11 hours....

A few scabby real bench runs for 30 mins is hardly cutting it...

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Arguing for Prime95 use then showing an Aida64 run.

Good job!

 

[easyrider]

I bet they could get another 200mhz out of those chips if they weren't worried about passing Prime 95

The first Picture is my Chip 5930k running 4.4ghz...The second pic Hes running 5930K @3.75 ghz....The trade off in terms of Vcore pumpage through the chip for an extra 200mhz is just not worth it....

Its about vcore, Temps and speed balance....

Is it worth running Ryzen at 1.45 v for 4.1ghz when 1.35 will get you 4ghz? Is that increase in 100mhz worth the extra heat and temps and potential lifespan of the chip?

Nope

But I guess you already know this right?

 

[Frozennova]

The first Picture is my Chip 5930k running 4.4ghz...The second pic Hes running 5930K @3.75 ghz....The trade off in terms of Vcore pumpage through the chip for an extra 200mhz is just not worth it....

Its about vcore, Temps and speed balance....

Is it worth running Ryzen at 1.45 v for 4.1ghz when 1.35 will get you 4ghz? Is that increase in 100mhz worth the extra heat and temps and potential lifespan of the chip?

Nope

But I guess you already know this right?

Your closer to 1.45v for a proper stable 4ghz on most if not all 1700s

 

[easyrider]

Your closer to 1.45v for a proper stable 4ghz on most if not all 1700s

This is what I wanted to find out...But Only AMDMatt has done any testing I have asked politely for...